Legal Opinion

Britton v. Killian

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided July 10, 1968No. File 155171PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShapiro, J.

The trustees under a trust created by the seventeenth clause of the mil of George P. McLean have instituted this action, naming the attorney general as defendant as representative of the public interest in the protection of trusts for charitable uses and purposes pursuant to § 3-125 of the General Statutes. They seek an adjudication that the dominant intent of the testator as expressed in clause seventeenth of his will can be carried out under the doctrine of approximation or, in the alternative, an adjudication that the fulfilment of that dominant intent will be prevented by strict adherence…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Shannon v. EnoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
  2. Bartlett v. SearsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1908
  3. Colonial Trust Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
  4. Weed v. ScofieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1901
  5. Newton v. Healy, Attorney GeneralSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Connecticut Bank & Trust Co. v. Hartford HospitalConnecticut Superior Court · 1971
  2. Daggett v. Children's CenterConnecticut Superior Court · 1970
  3. Blumenthal v. White, No. 308330 (Apr. 10, 1995)Connecticut Superior Court · 1995
  4. Blumenthal v. White, No. 308330 (Apr. 3, 1995)Connecticut Superior Court · 1995
  5. Harris v. Attorney GeneralConnecticut Superior Court · 1974

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API